6

Joe and I both really enjoyed Walther’s PPQ M2 5″ in 9mm. Actually, Joe is still enjoying it since he couldn’t bring himself to return the loaner and decided, instead, to purchase it. Considering how good that gun was, it was clear I had to get my hands on Walther’s .22 LR version of the PPQ. This isn’t a smaller scale, pot metal, cheapo plinker like so many .22 pistols out there — it’s the full-size PPQ you know and love, made by Walther, with the same controls and slide length options as its centerfire brother and with a pretty darn good trigger in its own right. This time I’m calling “dibs,” and just plunked down some sawbucks of my own to add this bad boy to the stable . . .

Just Like The Centerfire Version:

This review is going to be a bit shorter than normal, as I’m going to refer y’all back to Joe’s write-up on the 9mm version and/or my video review of it. If it isn’t already apparent, this is due to how faithfully the PPQ .22 mimics the “real” PPQ. You’ll find that basically everything about the ergonomics, controls, accuracy, reliability, quality, etc has carried over. Trigger, too, although it’s just slightly different… and this review will basically concentrate on the .22’s differences.

Build:

No zinc alloy here. The PPQ M2 .22’s slide is hard anodized, CNC machined aluminum. For long-term durability a steel breech block, containing the firing pin mechanism, extractor, breech face, etc is pinned into the slide. Another nice touch, although not unique to this pistol, is a steel pin inserted into the back of the slide lock notch. I smiled when I saw that, as it will prevent the steel slide stop from wearing away at and rounding out the notch.

19

The frame is the same polymer that you get on the big boy toys, and it has steel inserts for the slide rails, barrel block, and basically all of the moving parts. The rail at front is of standard Picatinny format.

18

One of those moving parts is an internal hammer, which is a big divergence from the striker-fired centerfire models. Keeping it internal maintains the same external appearance of the pistol. It’s possible that a .22 LR doesn’t punch the slide backwards with enough authority to reliably cock a striker with a spring stiff enough to ignite a .22 LR (vicious cycle, that), whereas a hammer can have enough leverage on it to work, but that’s just a guess as to why Walther made this change for the .22. At any rate, they managed to do it with a minimal change to trigger quality and feel. We’ll get into that later, but suffice it to say that if you didn’t field strip the gun you would never guess that such a big difference existed between the centerfire and rimfire models.

21

Some other functional similarities did carry over from Walther’s other .22 LR pistols (P22, primarily), such as a fixed, threaded barrel that’s clamped into the barrel block by a sleeve and a nut on the end. In this case I chose to test out the PPQ .22 Tactical version, which comes from Walther with a 1/2×28 thread adapter. However, it’s my understanding that the standard 4″ slide version and the 5″ slide version use the same type of barrel so you could add a thread adapter to either of those models as well. Primarily this is intended for mounting a suppressor, but if you’re bored you can also mount any AR-15 or other 1/2×28 muzzle device:

muzz

A P22 thread adapter does work on the PPQ, so that opens up options for aftermarket versions. I actually liked the look of the P22 adapter I had on hand much better than the included one, which was larger and spaced farther from the muzzle, so I’ve been running it instead and it appears in most of the photos here. I suppose that means if I were starting over and choosing one of the three available models, I’d go with the normal 4″ or 5″ and supply my own thread adapter. If this Tactical version came with tall suppressor sights I’d feel differently, but it doesn’t so I don’t.

Trigger:

At a pretty consistent 4.25 lbs, the trigger requires just a bit less force than the 9mm PPQ we tested, which came in at 4.75 lbs. It has a hair more creep and a very slightly longer reset — and the reset is softer in noise level and feel… it’s “light” — but overall I’d say that the differences aren’t easy to feel when shooting and that if you’re familiar with one you’ll feel right at home on the other. One of the reasons I love my CZ Kadet Adapter .22 LR upper conversion for my SP-01 is that it allows me to shoot .22 LR with the same grip, controls, and trigger as my go-to pistol, and the PPQ .22 can also provide this kind of experience for centerfire PPQ owners.

17

On the plus side when compared to a .22 conversion slide, the PPQ route is a complete pistol so it isn’t just a paperweight when it isn’t installed on your frame (which then, of course, turns your centerfire upper into a paperweight). Despite being a complete gun, with a street price of like $310 to $340 the PPQ .22 is actually less expensive than many conversion kits. On the negative side, the aluminum slide means the pistol is quite a bit lighter in weight than the centerfire ones, and being a firearm means it can’t simply ship to your door like a conversion kit can.

Ergos:

The PPQ .22 does not have swappable backstraps like the centerfire models do. I found this a little disappointing since it could affect that person who’s seriously using this as a less-expensive-to-shoot practice tool for their centerfire PPQ. That guy (or gal) aside, it’s really not a concern. The grip shape and dimensions will work really well for a huge range of hand sizes, and it’s every bit as comfortable and awesome as the “real” PPQ. Exact same texture, same size and feel as — just guestimating here — approximately the M backstrap of the centerfire (unfortunately I don’t have a PPQ to try and measure to be sure here, but Walther states the grip circumference as 5.3″).

13

Just like we said in the 9mm’s review, it feels freaking awesome in the hand.

11

Also, thanks to the .22 LR magazine being so slim but the PPQ .22’s grip being the normal width, the pistol benefits from a sweet magwell.

4

Magazine:

In the box you will find one magazine. It’s your standard .22 pistol fare, complete with open sides and thumb stud on the follower to enable easier loading. However, the normal PPQ .22 mag is a 12-rounder, which does set it apart from the very much industry standard 10-round capacity. 10-round mags are available. Additional magazines run about $24. Walther says that, despite some similarities, the PPQ .22 uses its own magazines and they aren’t compatible with those of other models.

23

Sights:

The front sight is polymer and the rear is polymer and steel. White dot in the front and black rear, which is my preference. The rear is adjustable for both windage and elevation. As mentioned before, it would be sweet if the Tactical version shipped with taller sights to clear a suppressor, but they’re the same sights as on the standard 4″ model. The 5″ target model comes with a fiber optic front sight.

2

I should mention that the sights are taller than most .22- or rimfire-specific suppressors on the market. Everything was aces with the Element 2 that I won’t be able to pick up for a few more months, and as you can see in the video it also ran flawlessly with it and was nice and quiet to boot. Until that Element 2 is released from jail, however, I’m using a 9mm can w/ fixed mount adapter (my Liberty Mystic) for all of my suppressed .22 LR shooting needs. That isn’t an uncommon thing for folks to do and it’ll probably obscure your sight picture a bit here.

Controls:

Identical to its centerfire siblings. The PPQ .22 is a PPQ M2 .22, which means a thumb button magazine release rather than the original PPQ’s trigger guard paddles. The button is not ambidextrous but can be swapped quite quickly from one side to the other for right- or left-handed use.

9

The same gripe I had about the extended slide catch lever carries over, as you would expect. Again, it’s back far enough that I tend to touch it with my strong hand thumb, which prevents it from moving up and locking the slide back on empty. It is really easy to manipulate since it’s right back where your thumb can easily reach, but the necessity of manipulating it is reduced quite a bit by it not functioning due to being right where your thumb can easily reach. Of course, Joe Grine didn’t have this issue at all and it all comes down to how you grip a pistol. Additionally, the importance of a slide that reliably locks back on empty is a matter of personal opinion for the intended use case of the pistol in question. Might be a problem for somebody wanting to use the centerfire PPQ defensively or in competition, but not very likely to matter at all on the .22 plinker.

Accuracy:

Pretty dang good. This target is from 15 yards with the butt of the pistol rested on the shooting bench at my local indoor range. Average 5-shot group size is 1.77 inches.

PPQ 22 Target

On The Range:

So, yes, the groups above show that PPQ M2 .22 is pretty accurate. That is, mechanically accurate plus however much I was screwing up sight alignment that day. What a target like that doesn’t say is how easy a gun is to shoot accurately when you’re out on the range.

The answer to that is “ridiculously easy.” I can’t miss with the darn thing. My buddy who joined me on the range one day actually hit the target quite a bit with it, which is quite the anomaly. The very workable sights, excellent trigger, and extremely low muzzle flip — something you expect from a .22 that’s made even better by the great ergos here — allow me to take advantage of solid mechanical accuracy and shoot as fast as I can move my finger while staying right on target. Hit, hit, hit, hit… it’s borderline silly. I can only imagine that the 5″ version with its longer sight radius and fiber optic front (something I’m used to from my competition gun) would be even better — not that it would matter under like 30 yards, where I feel like I’m basically incapable of missing with the PPQ .22.

1

Manipulating the firearm is very easy and folks with minimal hand strength would have no issues. The slide is incredibly easy to rack when the hammer is cocked, which is basically all of the time unless you dry fire it or encounter a dud round. With the hammer down there’s more resistance to cycling the slide, but it’s still quite a bit less than on your typical centerfire pistol. The mag release is easy to find and easy to press, and mags drop free. The reach to the trigger is comfortable and the trigger pull is light enough to be easy and controllable but heavy enough that it isn’t hazardous for less experienced shooters. Solid pistol for teaching first-timers (pending your opinion on manual safeties).

Reliability:

Suppressed or not, this pistol has been incredibly reliable. I’ve managed to run about 8 brands of ammo through it, from high velocity premium stuff to cheap, dirty bulk stuff, some with waxed lead bullets and some with jacketed round nose and jacketed hollow points, and the PPQ has cycled it all. Not a single failure of any sort since taking it out of the box when it was brand new.

3

It’s now pretty darn dirty, having shot about 400 suppressed rounds through it and another 50 or so unsuppressed and the factory oil and grease doing a good job of attracting carbon and other crud. I haven’t cleaned or lubed it, though, and it’s still running like a champ. I think I’ll just keep shooting it until it finally has a [non-ammo-related] stoppage and will update the review here if/when that happens.

Conclusion:

Obviously the 12-round mags are approximately 20% more fun than your typical 10-round mags, and this helps to make the PPQ M2 .22 LR insanely fun to shoot overall. With its stellar accuracy and reliability, amazing ergos, and with how quiet and easy it is to shoot suppressed, the fun factor is way high here and that is why the only thing going home to Walther in this case is a check.

24

 

25

Specifications: Walther PPQ M2 .22

Caliber: .22 LR
Capacity: 12+1
Barrel Length: Available in 4″, 4″ + thread adapter, or 5″ with long slide.
Overall Length: 7.1″, 7.7″, or 8.1″, respective to above barrel options.
Height: 5.3″
Width: 1.3″
Weight w/ Empty Magazine: 19 oz, 19.1 oz, or 20 oz, respective to barrel options.
MSRP: $429 for 4″, $449 for Tactical, and $469 for 5″. Street price starts at about $310.

Ratings (Out of Five Stars): 
Ratings are relative to ‘the average’ .22 LR pistol on the market.

Accuracy: * * * * *
Rested groups are definitely solid but nothing exemplary. However, the real-life fun on the range shootable accuracy of this thing, which is more important to you or you’d be getting Walther’s GSP instead, is amazing.

Ergonomics: * * * * 
There aren’t many pistols that feel better in the hand than the PPQ. The .22 LR version loses a star, however, for dropping the swappable backstraps of the centerfire models and for the slide catch lever that I’m not entirely compatible with.

Reliability: * * * * *
.22 pistols are known for being finicky. Ammo-sensitive. Dirtiness-sensitive. So far that’s 100% not the case here. Plus, the build quality inspires a higher level of confidence than the zinc alloy, farmed-out-to-a-BB-gun-factory norm. At least, norm in the sense of what’s popular these days, and certainly among .22 pistols that look like centerfire pistols and where the entire slide reciprocates (rather than an internal bolt or small cut-out portion of the slide, which I’ve historically found to function more reliably).

Customization: * * 
A thread adapter certainly opens up a near-endless list of doodads you can affix to the business end of the PPQ .22. This pistol will fit in holsters made for the centerfire PPQs. However, there still isn’t much in the way of aftermarket support for things like sights.

Overall: * * * * *
I’m not going to name names but I don’t, haven’t, and won’t own basically any of the .22 LR pistols on the market that look like centerfire guns and function whereby the entire slide reciprocates. I had more or less discounted this entire segment of the market. Again, I just bought this PPQ M2 .22.

56 Responses to Gun Review: Walther PPQ M2 .22 LR

    • Totally agree.
      Best line out of any gun review I’ve ever read: “if you’re bored you can also mount any AR-15 or other 1/2×28 muzzle device”

    • Hahaha 🙂

      I’ve solicited like 15 to 18 muzzle devices from various companies to do a “shootout” review, which will be coming probably at the end of the month here. That dragon’s head is one of them. On a .223 it’s supposed to shoot some fire out of the mouth, nostrils, and eyes haha. It’s from: http://www.spitzlead.com/ …I have NOT yet shot any rounds through it so can’t comment on it other than it’s pretty funny 🙂

    • not me, ever since my p22 frame cracked and walther claimed it was “outside its lifespan” (10yrs old, prob 30k rounds, but i didnt tell them round count) i choose not to buy pot metal guns, or support walther for bunk biz practices.

      it wouldnt be a big deal, but this was the first pistol i ever bought, so was very special, and now i am without. i guess i coulda bought a ruger, they have phenomenal customer service. i had a 20 year old mk2 10” bull that was rusty, and the frame to reciever fit was sloppy, and they fixed it (repalced lower?) and reblued it, PRO-BONO!!!

      so, yes i am mad bro, but i just cant support bs biz practices…

      • Bro no offense but that’s way out of the warranty period. The P22 has always come with a 1-year warranty. If you want a pistol with a lifetime warranty then buy one (many other Walther models have lifetime warranties for the original purchaser). But… come on… what can you reasonably expect when you try to warranty a 10-year-old product that had a 1-year warranty?

        …and just to be sure we’re clear here in case you didn’t see it in the review, the PPQ M2 .22 has no ‘pot metal’ (zinc alloy, ZAMAK, etc) in it at all…

        • “No zinc alloy here. The PPQ M2 .22’s slide is hard anodized, CNC machined aluminum”

          According to the Walther website it IS zinc alloy, so somebody is wrong (and I hope it’s Walther???).

      • Dude, it’s 10 years old with 30,000 rounds. No offense but are you kidding? Come on man…what did you pay for it? Yeah it sucks but for you to write what you did is ridiculous.

  1. That internal hammer setup looks remarkably similar to my S&W M&P22. Does the Smith/Walther relationship still exist?

  2. I have an older Walther p22. Gun works good with most .22 ammo . It does not like bulk ammo very much. I think the main selling point of the Walther 22 is… that it does not look like a .22.

    Gun Manufacturers would sell a lot more .22 guns if Ammo Suppliers could keep up with the demand for .22 ammo. I have avoided buying .22 guns simply because I can hardly find ammo for the ones I already have.

    • This PPQ had zero issues with 4 or 5 brands of bulk ammo. It also looks even less “like a .22” since it’s full-sized. The P22 has normal pistol style but is downscaled and much smaller, so you can still tell it’s a .22 mostly due to the tiny grip circumference.

      • Jeremy I also have the same issue with my gun it is very picky about its ammo I can only shoot Remington golden bullets or CCI mini mags. I love the gun but for me that’s its down fall, even worse now that ammo is hard to get.

      • What are the best ammo brands and bulk ammo brands for the PPQ? We tried Browning’s Performance yellow box and it shot terribly. The Remington Thunderbolt did great. Anyone have any experience?

        • I’ve not been back to the range since my second opportunity, where I used the M22 and the two CCI types, therefore I can’t say more than I did in my update on November 2nd.

    • Amen.

      Hate my Mosquito.

      I got an SR-22, which is great, no doubt, but just a little small for my mitts. This looks perfect and matches my 9mm PPQ. Except I wished they would have kept the Euro mag release paddles. Can’t have it all.

  3. “It’s possible that a .22 LR doesn’t punch the slide backwards with enough authority to reliably cock a striker with a spring stiff enough to ignite a .22 LR (vicious cycle, that)”

    If that were the case then my Neos wouldn’t work, and neither would the Glock conversions.

    • True. I kinda discount the NEOS because it has a slide insert that reciprocates rather than the whole slide. I have always considered that to be much more reliable. That doesn’t explain GLOCK conversion kits running, though. I haven’t used one myself so I don’t know if they only run powerful ammo of if they’ll handle cheap-o bulk box stuff also and if they ever have light strikes or something like that. I know one of the brands has a solid reputation though. I was definitely pleased to see this PPQ run everything.

    • True. I can’t say I really like seeing that but it’s obviously more than sufficient. The barrel sleeve handles all of the wear from the slide cycling and takes most or all of the load from anything you add to the muzzle (and it looks like a “normal” barrel when the slide is back. I just uploaded another photo to the review that shows what this looks like (the very last photo now). That Mystic is a big, heavy suppressor and I couldn’t shoot quickly enough to move the point of impact or anything of that sort. Thin barrels is also pretty standard for many .22s on the market. Even many of them that appear to have thick barrels and don’t have a removable sleeve actually have only a very thin, steel barrel insert inside of a wrapper of polymer or an inexpensive metal over it to give it the look of being thicker. The pressure generated by a .22 lr just doesn’t require thicker steel.

  4. I’ve had mine since May. After ~3k rounds still no issues other than some dirty Armscor FTEs. It’s great for taking noobs to the range. The only downside is I can’t find mags anywhere.

  5. Only one problem: I haven’t seen a single round of .22LR in my corner of the country in going on 2 years now. Until I see shelves consistently stocked full of bricks, I wouldn’t consider buying another .22.

    On the other hand: I did try the PPQ M2 in 9mm, and it be sweeeeeet…

  6. I love my PPQ M1 so it’s too bad this pistol got such a good review here, means I’m probably gonna have to buy it. I gotta pay my rent too you know, jerks.

  7. I had a P22 but after a yr or so moved to the Sig Mosquito. In under 1k rds the slide cracked. I was happy bc they sent me a brand new Mosquito. It’s run great for over 10k rds. I enjoyed my P22 but it was just missing something. I got it the first few months it was out, maybe the first batches weren’t the best. I think this guy will be on the to get list. Running 22 pistols with my cans is just too much fun. Plus I’ve got more NEW people into shooting 22s with a can than anything else.

  8. I gotta ask.

    The review mentions “jacketed round nose and jacketed hollow point” ammunition. In .22 LR?

    I know that during WWII, Remington/UMC made corrosive-primed .22 LR FMJ for the War Department. Supposedly it was for the OSS, to use in suppressed .22 caliber firearms in combat, the jackets being required under the Hague Convention.

    I thought these days that stuff was for cartridge collectors only. Unless someone else is making .22 LR FMJ? Because if such a thing exists, I’d like to get some and try it in my Ruger 22/45. And I’m still trying to imagine true JHP ammo in .22 LR.

    • Sorry, that was a bit sloppy and ‘colloquial’ rather than technically accurate. The bullets in question are actually plated, not jacketed. Either solid lead projectiles with round noses that are copper plated, or hollow point lead projectiles that tend to have slightly truncated noses and are copper plated. I also put lots of bare lead or waxed lead through the PPQ. My strong preference is for copper plated bullets though as it limits your exposure to lead. I hate when I shoot a lot of .22 LR and my thumb has a giant lead streak on it from loading bare lead bullets. Plus, there’s other lead exposure from shooting bare lead bullets and it messes up the inside of your suppressor a lot more as lead will vaporize and fragment off from the hot gasses and going down the bore, etc. Copper plated are just WAY cleaner.

      BTW — there are .22 jacketed bullets, but I’m not sure if any are loaded in LR. There are tons of options in .22 WMR (winchester magnum rimfire aka .22 Mag) for legitimately jacketed, not plated, bullets.

  9. The PPK/S .22 has a small barrel sleeve that fits over the end of its threaded barrel. When the slide is forward, it looks like a ‘normal’ barrel and you can’t tell it is threaded. More importantly, you can disassemble the weapon without having to remove the barrel sleeve/adapter.
    Does the PPQ .22 have a similar ‘discrete’ barrel sleeve, or only that giant barrel adapter that sticks out the end of the slide when the slide is forward? It seems a pain to have to remove the threaded barrel adapter/sleeve every time you want to disassemble and clean the weapon.
    Also, are there any other rear sights available (such as a two dot), instead of the plain black rear sight?

    • This is the “tactical” version that comes with the thread adapter. The same adapter fits the PPK/S (which I also checked out a while ago). Without it, the design in this regard is the same. Also the P22 and the M&P22 and probably others as well.

  10. Who makes and where did you get the upper left muzzle break. Looks like that one would not get in the way of the sights?

    thanks
    Dean

  11. I purchased the PPQ 22LR and it has functioned flawlessly . Feels great in the hand and more accurate than any other pistol I have. I also purchased the thread adapter separately to use a supressor later.
    The trigger is absolutely sweet !
    Fit and finish are beautiful as well, this is a really nice firearm when you inspect it, unlike the colt and sig 1911 22s. They just seem cheap to me with paint on the slide and a plastic trigger.
    Buying one for my mom as well, who is just getting into shooting and loved the gun.

  12. PPQ 22 or M&P22 Compact?

    I’m torn between one or the other for a first time gun user (my wife). Some criteria are:
    – easy to rack the slide, easy to eject the mag, and easy to operate the safety.
    – decent sights, or replaceable ones.
    – very reliable, at least with one type of ammo
    – threaded barrel.
    – fits a woman’s small to medium-sized hands
    – potentially concealable
    – We are planning to add a suppressor, a green laser and weapon light combo. So I suppose the ability to handle the front-weight without feeling to unbalanced would be preferable.

    Neither gun can be rented in our area to try. We have fired the SR22 and liked it, but the safety and slide are pretty stiff for my wife. We do not want to get a Ruger 10/45 or Buckmark.

    Don’t know if we would upgrade to a S&W or Walter in 9mm later.

    Do you recommend one over the other?

    Thanks!

  13. Great review. Thanks!!!
    I was a Walther fan immediately after I purchased the PPK/S .380ACP and the .22LR. I leaned towards Glocks, then the PPQ M2 9mm came out. I couldn’t resist how it felt in my hand, and oh what a magical trigger reset! The ergonmics alone have increased my 8 yd accuracy of 17 rounds to 1.8 in. Incredible. Put Trijicon Orange Dot HD night sights and a Crimson Trace green Railmaster Pro, and you have the Ultimate Home Defense rig. Now, it comes out in .22LR. Hard to pass up.
    One question:
    I want to work on precision shooting, noncompetitive for now. I was very close to a Mark III or Buck Mark. Since I am extremely happy with my 9mm PPQ, will I be satisfied enough with the 5″ barrel on the PPQ .22LR regarding accuracy?

  14. I have a 5″ PPQ 22 on order, and very much look forward to trying it out. But there is an inaccuracy in this review. According to Walther’s web site, the PPQ M2 22 slide is die cast zinc, just like the P22. Not machined aluminum.

    • I stand corrected. Apparently the Walther web site is incorrect. The PPQ does have a machined aluminum slide. No pot metal. And apparently this gun is actually manufactured by Walther, and not by Umarex.

  15. One question to Jeremy please: Did you ever try .22 subsonic ammo and did it work without problems?

    Thanks
    Stefan

  16. I had a P22…hated it……….said i’d never buy another Walther……….bought this one LOVE IT…..it is not a P22.
    Now I think I need the 9.

    • You won’t regret purchasing the 9mm (assuming you haven’t already). Best trigger on the polymer semiauto market…darn close to a good 1911 trigger. I’m working in reverse order and am very interested in the .22 version. Any problems or concerns with yours?

  17. I bought the PPQ .22 M2 in 5″. This is The Best Running .22 pistol I have Ever used in 55 years. I was missing a .22 in my collection, I am Very Happy I chose this pistol. It is very astonishing for a .22. No downsides period. BUY ONE

    • What ammo do you use on your PPQ M2? We’re having some trouble with ours cycling/ejecting.

  18. Hi,

    May i ask you please to tell me what is the brand and model of the threaded adapter that you have installed on this pistol instead of the original one?

  19. Sorry to throw water on the above comments, but I purchased my PPQ 22LR 4″ yesterday, cleaned it (watched the video to be sure I did it right) then took it to the range. My first 10 shots were great and close to center. The next 80-90 had numerous FTE (fail to eject), around 20 or so, using Federal 1200 or 1240 FPS 40 grain LRN. (That’s all I brought with me.) I’ve contacted Walther and the gun dealer, we’ll see what they say and do. Walther claims a forever warranty.
    I do like the gun, and purchased it because it’s the only one I’ve found that my arthritic-handed wife can use. Hopefully the FTE problem has a solution other than going to CCI 1640 FPS ammo. My S&W M&P22 has never had a problem with 1200FPS or greater ammo.

  20. Update to my previous post (under my full name): After cleaning it again and using some of Walther’s ‘preferred’ ammo it is working fine. I ran a couple of strings of M-22 (one of their preferred ammo types), CCI 1200 and 1640 FPS, and a Remington 1200 FPS without any problems, so it appears the earlier problem is gone.

  21. How well does it do with Heavily lubed ammo such as Standard +? Torn between a suppressor ready 4″ and a 5″ with the better front sight and longer sight radius. Must admit it would be used primarily for steel plate shooting so the 5″ is probably the better option.

  22. Using ammo above 1200 fps seems to do the job. I used the Remington Golden Bullet 36 gr at 1280 fps and no failures just very dirty. Recommend to clean the gun every 300 rds. Very good accuracy at 15 meters. Will try 25 yards next time. I love this gun. It feels very good and the reset is wonderful. Rapid fire no issues. Target acquisition with the FO sight is quick. Steel targets no problem.

  23. I agree w/AR sniper. In general HV stuff (1200 fps+) seems to work well. I’ve been using the 40 grain copper plated Remington “golden bullets” and the Federal automatch stuff does well. Winchester Super X, Fed champion, American eagle

    I tried a box of the cheapest Federal “value pack” bulk though, I’m not sure what velocity that is rated at. That resulted in a lot of FTE/FTF’s and was like having a bolt-action pistol.

    Some standard velocity works though, you just have to find out which. CCI standard velocity (the 40gr 1070 fps stuff) cycles reliably and appears to be the most accurate non-match ammo so I’ve mainly used that. (I never tried mini mags, I assume those would work well, too.)

    Aguila standard vel. didn’t cycle consistently, and neither did Federal gold medal match (711B, 1080 fps).

    Oddly Aguila pistol match (925 fps) and RWS pistol target (also ~900fps) also did cycle well, though I only tried one box of each due to cost. The RWS was pretty accurate, but CCI SV is close and much cheaper

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *